"I had to see this and now so do you" mentality.
"I had to see this and now so do you" mentality.
Context.
No and also context.
Incorrect.
Context.
No and also context.
Incorrect.
I'm inclined to say the same of you.
I'm inclined to say the same of you.
Also scientific "facts" aren't a thing, and if you think they are, you have fundamentally failed to understand the purpose of science.
Also scientific "facts" aren't a thing, and if you think they are, you have fundamentally failed to understand the purpose of science.
Maybe you should engage in the field of philosophy and apply some logical rigor to why you cling desperately to 19th outdated biological categorism?
Maybe you should engage in the field of philosophy and apply some logical rigor to why you cling desperately to 19th outdated biological categorism?
While the characterisations are structured around reproductive functions, it's blatantly not exclusive to them.
While the characterisations are structured around reproductive functions, it's blatantly not exclusive to them.
If you change how those attributes are categorised you get different sexes. You can shove everything into male and female if you don't like thinking but it's a very reductive method
If you change how those attributes are categorised you get different sexes. You can shove everything into male and female if you don't like thinking but it's a very reductive method
Two has become the default thanks to Christian puritanism and western colonialism, but prior to that three or four were relatively common.
Two has become the default thanks to Christian puritanism and western colonialism, but prior to that three or four were relatively common.